Photo Credit: DC Studio
The following is a summary of “Demographic differences between patients selecting video or telephone for contraceptive counseling via telehealth,” published in the September 2024 issue of Obstetrics and Gynecology by Freeman et al.
Researchers conducted a retrospective study exploring differences in demographic characteristics and telehealth usability between patients who chose video vs. telephone for telehealth contraceptive counseling.
They compared the interpersonal quality of contraceptive counseling between in-person and telehealth visits at a single Title X-funded clinic. Before the clinical visit, a non-clinician counselor provided structured contraceptive counseling based on the patient’s preferred modality. After counseling, respondents completed an electronic survey, which included the Telehealth Usability Questionnaire (TUQ). Post-visit, the counselor evaluated perceived patient engagement. Area Deprivation Index (ADI) percentiles were calculated to characterize the neighborhood environment. Characteristics between patients choosing video and telephone were compared using Poisson regression, and analyses stratified by ADI were performed to test for effect modification.
The results showed 149 patients in the telehealth group (March 2021 and June 2022), with 146 (98%) included; 70% of respondents chose the telephone. Higher ADI, Black race, and lower educational level (<4-year college) were associated with selecting the telephone in the unadjusted analysis. However, after stratification by ADI, only lower educational levels remained associated with the choice of telephone among respondents from more deprived neighborhoods (aRR 1.46, 95%CI 1.01-2.11). No differences in TUQ scores were observed between respondents choosing telephone and video.
They concluded that more patients with a higher ADI chose telephone over video for telehealth contraceptive counseling, suggesting that offering telephone-based telehealth may improve access for those seeking contraceptive services.
Source: contraceptionjournal.org/article/S0010-7824(24)00399-8/abstract
